You're watching...
Former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese on the Supreme Court taking on the health-care law.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
President Obama mobile warning is Supreme Court to keep its hands off itself Carol law and Republicans.
My next guest says that the law is unconstitutional -- ago it has nothing to do loses a lot of business news.
Knows a little bit about the -- you might remember.
And as Ronald Reagan confidant but -- as Ronald Reagan's attorney general.
One of the leaders of the Reagan revolution and one of the most respected.
Attorney generals this country's ever had it's very good to have you -- case.
What did you make of the big constitutional.
Professor lawyer.
Arguing that pointed to the -- today.
Well first -- we've got to remember that despite what that some people say Obama was never professor he was an instructor in the law.
And I think it's clear from what he just -- that is why we was not a professor.
That that to me was a sign of desperation.
On the part of the president.
The oral arguments did not go very well for the administration.
And I think their panic now that the court might in fact follow the constitution.
Which means absolutely that they would declare the individual mandate unconscious.
-- now we -- get into the politics of all of this -- one argument goes that if it's a 54 decision and presumably to conservatives.
All of the slap this down the administration's gonna come back later and say.
It was those SOB Republicans who stopped us again and don't and if you remember gore bush.
It's all over that again at how is that gonna go down.
I don't think they're gonna be able to make that stick because as we know already 70% of the public even people who like the law.
Agree in the polls that it's unconstitutional.
So I think they're gonna have a hard time making that stick I'm also -- course.
Also of course the the the whole theory of judicial activism is against them.
Judicial activism is not win the court finds that -- congressionally passed law is unconstitutional.
Judicial activism is when.
Judges substitute their own policy preferences.
They're personal biases or their own views for what the constitution -- the law actually says.
If we look at examples of judicial activism we see how different it is from what the president's talking about.
For example in the -- locates Akeelah against the city of New London.
Where the at Citi wanted to take a private persons own home.
And it take it and in effect sell the property so they get more tax revenue.
-- and they.
Took the eminent domain provisions out of the Fifth Amendment which says that private property they should not be taken except for public use.
And they change that around to say public purpose.
Likewise.
In the famous case that's -- really at the bottom of that this particular.
View of that of the president and that is wicket against silver and the case that that expanded.
The the idea of of the yet.
Commerce clause.
To go beyond regulation of congress which was the commerce but what the constitution actually says and substitute instead.
The idea of regulating anything that affects commerce so if they go one step even beyond that.
It would be indeed judicial activism if they -- the Obama care.
Individual mandate to stand.
Horowitz of the activism really being addressed here is that perpetrated by of the legislative and executive branches -- and that's what the objective is in the court would be.
Redressing -- if they were to vote against this.
Bomb or or -- absolutely right.
So so let me it was actually get a sense then of how them.
As an attorney general someone who knows -- -- well.
And how it practices just that the PR part of this if you indulge me that is this is the same president -- embarrass the justices on the well of the house during -- union.
Speech on a decision that he found particularly onerous and that was ironically.
Such is supporting tax even though he himself.
Is this a stick supporting -- today that fast forward to today talking about.
The justices should go too far and at this would have looked like a political -- -- -- just paraphrasing here.
Does he damaged -- whatever good Willie might have.
Went -- justices no matter their political leanings with this kind of talk that they're gonna -- a little 60.
That that.
Well I think that the -- the five judges of the court that are most likely to file the constitution.
Are far above any pettiness already taking into consideration.
What the president had to say.
But I think in effect he has weakened his own position.
A by his extreme statements.
And I think he has had done great damage to his cause -- particularly as far as the people are concerned.
And that -- -- subliminally but some justices may not like it.
But all of them I think will rise above it what is real activism I think is the clear idea that there -- justices on the court.
Who from the start but -- not interested in finding out information during the oral argument but actually advocating a position.
Even to the point of trying to help the poor that's solicitor general and I when he was floundering at one point.
-- that was very weird you're right about that.
-- -- -- -- -- --
